ArticleNeurospine2021
A Comparison of Mortality and Morbidity Between Complex and Degenerative Spine Surgery in Prospectively Collected Data From 2,280 Procedures.
Article in Neurospine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protocol for the development of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) recommendations for individuals undergoing surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy.Spinal cord · 2025Article
- Independent Prognostic Factors Associated With Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes in the Prospective Evaluation of Elderly Deformity Surgery (PEEDS) Study.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Screw Insertional Torque Measurement in Spine Surgery: Correlation With Bone Mineral Density and Hounsfield Unit.Neurospine · 2023Article
- First clinical experience with posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a thermal-sprayed silver-containing hydroxyapatite-coated cage.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Development of a COX-2-Selective Fluorescent Probe for the Observation of Early Intervertebral Disc Degeneration.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe reported incidence of complications and/or adverse events (AEs) following spine surgery varies greatly. A validated, systematic, reproducible reporting system to quantify AEs was used in 2 prospective cohorts, from 2 spine surgery centers, conducting either complex or purely degenerative spine surgery; in a comparative fashion. The aim was to highlight the differences between 2 distinctly different prospective cohorts with patients from the same background population.
methodsAEs were registered according to the predefined AE variables in the SAVES (Spine AdVerse Events Severity) system which was used to record all intra- and perioperative AEs. Additional outcomes, including mortality, length of stay, wound infection requiring revision, readmission, and unplanned revision surgery during the index admission, were also registered.
resultsA total of 593 complex and 1,687 degenerative procedures were consecutively included with 100% data completion. There was a significant difference in morbidity when comparing the total number of AEs between the 2 groups (p < 0.001): with a mean number of 1.42 AEs per patient (n = 845) in the complex cohort, and 0.97 AEs per patient (n = 1,630) in the degenerative cohort.
conclusionIn this prospective study comparing 2 cohorts, we report the rates of AEs related to spine surgery using a validated reproducible grading system for registration. The rates of morbidity and mortality were significantly higher following complex spine surgery compared to surgery for degenerative spine disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.